From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rajendra Nayak Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] mfd: twl-core: Add initial DT support for twl4030/twl6030 Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:12:10 +0530 Message-ID: <4E816232.5020502@ti.com> References: <1317055821-20652-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <1317055821-20652-7-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1317055821-20652-7-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Benoit Cousson Cc: tony@atomide.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, paul@pwsan.com, khilman@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Balaji T K , Graeme Gregory , Samuel Ortiz List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Monday 26 September 2011 10:20 PM, Benoit Cousson wrote: > Add initial device-tree support for twl familly chips. s/familly/family > The current version is missing the regulator entries due > to the lack of DT regulator bindings for the moment. > Only the simple sub-modules that do not depend on > platform_data information can be initialized properly. > > Add documentation for the Texas Instruments TWL Integrated Chip. > > Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson > Cc: Balaji T K > Cc: Graeme Gregory > Cc: Samuel Ortiz > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl-familly.txt | 47 +++++++++++++++++ > drivers/mfd/twl-core.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++-- > 2 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl-familly.txt s/familly.txt/family.txt > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl-familly.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl-familly.txt > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..ff4cacd > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl-familly.txt > @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ > +Texas Instruments TWL family > + > +The TWLs are Integrated Power Management Chips. > +Some version might contain much more analog function like > +USB transceiver or Audio amplifier. > +These chips are connected to an i2c bus. > + > + > +Required properties: > +- compatible : Must be "ti,twl4030"; > + For Integrated power-management/audio CODEC device used in OMAP3 > + based boards > +- compatible : Must be "ti,twl6030"; > + For Integrated power-management used in OMAP4 based boards > +- interrupts : This i2c device has an IRQ line connected to the main SoC > +- interrupt-controller : Since the twl support several interrupts internally, > + it is considered as an interrupt controller cascaded to the SoC one. > +- #interrupt-cells =<1>; > +- interrupt-parent : The parent interrupt controller. > + > +Optional node: > +- Child nodes contain in the twl. The twl family is made of severals variants > + that support a different number of features. > + The children nodes will thus depend of the capabilty of the variant. > + > + > +Example: > +/* > + * Integrated Power Management Chip > + * http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/twl6030.pdf > + */ > +twl@48 { > + compatible = "ti,twl6030"; > + reg =<0x48>; What does the 'reg' property signify here for twl? > + interrupts =<39>; /* IRQ_SYS_1N cascaded to gic */ > + interrupt-controller; > + #interrupt-cells =<1>; > + interrupt-parent =<&gic>; > + #address-cells =<1>; > + #size-cells =<0>; > + > + twl_rtc { > + compatible = "ti,twl_rtc"; > + interrupts =<11>; > + reg =<0>; Does the 'reg' property need to be faked for every twl child node, even if it does not have any? > + }; > +}; > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c > index 01ecfee..3ef0b43 100644 > --- a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c > +++ b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c > @@ -33,6 +33,10 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > +#include > +#include > > #include > > @@ -1182,22 +1186,53 @@ twl_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id) > int status; > unsigned i; > struct twl4030_platform_data *pdata = client->dev.platform_data; > + struct device_node *node = client->dev.of_node; > u8 temp; > int ret = 0; > > + if (node&& !pdata) { > + /* > + * XXX: Temporary fake pdata until the information > + * is correctly retrieved by every TWL modules from DT. > + */ > + pdata = kzalloc(sizeof(struct twl4030_platform_data), > + GFP_KERNEL); devm_kzalloc instead? > + if (!pdata) { > + status = -ENOMEM; > + goto exit; > + } > + > + /* > + * XXX: For the moment the IRQs for TWL seems to be encoded in > + * the global OMAP space. That should be cleaned to allow > + * dynamically adding a new IRQ controller. > + */ > + if ((id->driver_data)& TWL6030_CLASS) { > + pdata->irq_base = TWL6030_IRQ_BASE; > + pdata->irq_end = pdata->irq_base + TWL6030_BASE_NR_IRQS; > + } else { > + pdata->irq_base = TWL4030_IRQ_BASE; > + pdata->irq_end = pdata->irq_base + TWL4030_BASE_NR_IRQS; > + } > + irq_domain_add_simple(node, pdata->irq_base); > + } > + > if (!pdata) { > dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data?\n"); > - return -EINVAL; > + status = -EINVAL; > + goto fail_free; > } > > if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter, I2C_FUNC_I2C) == 0) { > dev_dbg(&client->dev, "can't talk I2C?\n"); > - return -EIO; > + status = -EIO; > + goto fail_free; > } > > if (inuse) { > dev_dbg(&client->dev, "driver is already in use\n"); > - return -EBUSY; > + status = -EBUSY; > + goto fail_free; > } > > for (i = 0; i< TWL_NUM_SLAVES; i++) { > @@ -1269,10 +1304,20 @@ twl_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id) > twl_i2c_write_u8(TWL4030_MODULE_INTBR, temp, REG_GPPUPDCTR1); > } > > - status = add_children(pdata, id->driver_data); > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_DEVICE is the #ifdef really needed? > + if (node) > + status = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL,&client->dev); > + else > +#endif > + status = add_children(pdata, id->driver_data); > + > fail: > if (status< 0) > twl_remove(client); > +fail_free: > + if (node) > + kfree(pdata); > +exit: > return status; > } >